Book Analysis
Background. The impetus for this project is to make you especially familiar with one<br /><br />
particular movement such that you can be one of the class “experts” on the particularities<br /><br />
of that movement as the quarter unfolds. This should be especially helpful as we work<br /><br />
through social movement theories and seek evidence to support or refute those theories.<br /><br />
The book analysis. In writing this paper, students should demonstrate a careful reading of<br /><br />
the text and consider how their specific case study might be used in order to generalize to<br /><br />
the dynamics of social movements in general. The book analysis, therefore, should be not<br /><br />
just an overview of the book, but should discuss, in as much detail as space permits, how<br /><br />
this case study relates to the questions raised below. The paper should be written in a<br /><br />
standard 12-pt. font with 1-inch margins all around, and must be between 6-7 pages in<br /><br />
length, or approximately 1500-1750 words. It goes without saying that copying or<br /><br />
paraphrasing an existing review of the book will be considered plagiarism and treated<br /><br />
accordingly; the same goes for collaboration between students in the course, as this is a<br /><br />
solo (not collaborative) assignment.<br /><br />
Selecting a book. Choose one of the following six books on which to write your analysis.<br /><br />
Reviews of books not on this list will not be accepted. All should be available through the<br /><br />
library, although you will likely find it worthwhile to purchase a copy so that you can mark<br /><br />
up the pages.<br /><br />
Almeida, Paul. 2008. Waves of Protest: Popular Struggle in El Salvador, 1925-2005.<br /><br />
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.<br /><br />
Dale, John D. 2011. Free Burma: Transnational Legal Action and Corporate Accountability.<br /><br />
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.<br /><br />
Martin, Isaac W. 2013. Rich People’s Movements: Grassroots Campaigns to Untax the<br /><br />
One Percent. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br /><br />
Milkman, Ruth. 2006. LA Story: Immigrant Workers and the Future of the U.S. Labor<br /><br />
Movement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press.<br /><br />
Raeburn, Nicole. 2004. Changing Corporate America From Inside Out: Lesbian and Gay<br /><br />
Workplace Rights. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.<br /><br />
Skocpol, Theda and Vanessa Williamson. 2012. The Tea Party and the Remaking of<br /><br />
Republican Conservatism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br /><br />
While reading the book: Students are encouraged to take notes while reading. This will not<br /><br />
only help with the review but will make it much easier to write a high-quality analysis.<br /><br />
2<br /><br />
Analysis content. The paper should begin with the bibliographic information (i.e. an ASAformatted<br /><br />
reference for the book, which can be copy-and-pasted from the list above) and a<br /><br />
brief (less than two pages) description of the content of the book. The dominant portion of<br /><br />
the piece should address the below issues. Since these are broad issues, and one could<br /><br />
not possibly address all of these issues in a single analysis of this length, I leave it up to<br /><br />
you to choose the questions that are most relevant to the movement you are studying.<br /><br />
A. How did external factors influence the movement? For example, did the movement<br /><br />
depend upon another group for support? What role did the state play in facilitating or<br /><br />
repressing the movement? Did the movement arise in order to express specific<br /><br />
grievances? Did other movements influence this movement? Were there any major<br /><br />
historical events that shaped the movement?<br /><br />
B. How important were internal factors for this movement? For example, what types of<br /><br />
organizational form(s) were most prevalent in the movement and what<br /><br />
consequences did this have for the movement? How were leaders chosen in the<br /><br />
movement and what power did they have compared to other participants? What<br /><br />
significance did class, race, gender, sexual orientation, or other axes of difference<br /><br />
have for this movement?<br /><br />
C. To what extent were culture and identity important for this movement? For example,<br /><br />
were the goals of the movement challenging of the larger culture or supportive of it?<br /><br />
What role did cultural or identity factors play in the movement’s attempts to recruit<br /><br />
participants? Did participants have a sense of larger purpose in their participation?<br /><br />
Was the movement successful in framing its goals, ideals, and practices to other<br /><br />
(outside) groups?<br /><br />
D. Other questions such as: What types of tactics did the movement employ (and were<br /><br />
some more successful than others? If so, why)? What was the response of the state<br /><br />
and/or other institutions that the movement targeted? Was the movement<br /><br />
successful (both in terms of its self-defined goals and also in the opinion of the<br /><br />
author)? What were the consequences of the movement’s success or failure for the<br /><br />
internal structure of the movement?<br /><br />
All papers should describe the methodology used by the author in studying this movement.<br /><br />
What were their sources: interviews with participants? Participant observation? Newspaper<br /><br />
records? Archival data?<br /><br />
In addition, all papers should conclude with a brief critique of the major strengths and/or<br /><br />
weaknesses of the book manuscript under revie

TO ORDER FOR THIS QUESTION OR A SIMILAR ONE, CLICK THE ORDER NOW BUTTON AND ON THE ORDER FORM, FILL ALL THE REQUIRED DETAILS THEN TRACE THE DISCOUNT CODE,
TYPE IT ON THE DISCOUNT BOX AND CLICK ON ‘USE CODE’ TO EFFECT YOUR DISCOUNT. THANK YOU

Book analysis

Graded Homework Assignment
On Description and Inference, Types of Evidence, Standard Form, Arguments and Sub-arguments
Chapters 1, 2, 3 in text
20 points Total:  20% of Final Grade

All assignments should be typed;  should include the numbers of the questions; and should follow directions below, as to use of complete sentences, standard form, sub-argument, etc. wherever I so indicate.

Part I of this assignment is based on the New York Times Magazine article, “Identification, Please” by Helen MacDonald, June 19th, 2015.  A link to this article is provided under Part I (Description and Inference).

Part II of this assignment is based on the New York Times article, “Roads to Ruin”, by op-ed contributor, William F. Laurance, April 12th, 2015.  A  link to this article is provided under Part II (on argument,  sub-argument, standard form, & types of evidence).

and Part III.

Part I:  Description and inference:  (6  points total)
This question is based on the following New York Times Magazine article:

ON NATURE
Identification, Please
BY HELEN MACDONALD
Learning how to use a field guide can make you feel at home anywhere in the world.

Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://nyti.ms/1MRG09c

The above article begins with a “description” by the author of a view of Australia’s Blue Mountains National Park.  In the first paragraph of an approximately 2 page essay (double-spaced) you should address whether or not the author also makes any inferences within her description, or if she suggests that, from the description that she has just given, that she must now make some inferences.  You need not repeat the entire description, but only have to address the question about inferences.  The rest of your approximately 2 page essay, you should address the following questions, after reading the entire above article:

Most of this article includes a discussion of “natural-history field guides” by which people can try to identify various animals, birds, and plants in nature when they come across them during hikes, in their backyards, etc.   This raises some interesting questions about description and inference.  Do these guides actually provide only “descriptions” of the birds, plants, etc.,  or do some of the guides already include inferences or interpretations of the animals and plants?  Secondly, must the user of “field guides” make inferences from the “descriptions” of birds, animals and plants in the field guides, when they are trying to identify these animals and plants in the field?   What types of inferences, and how do they make these inferences in the field?   In your essay, you should address these questions, by drawing upon examples and details from the article.  You may also include other observations or your own about what the author discusses, especially if your observations also involve your own inferences, or involve comments about what counts as description and what counts as inference.  If you have ever used a field guide or some other type of guide to make identifications, you may include your experience in the essay, too.

PART II:  Argument, Sub-Argument, Standard Form and Types of Evidence (Total: 14 points:  #1:  10 points;  #2:  4 points) TOTAL IS 4 PAGES

This part is based on the following New York Times article:

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Roads to Ruin
BY WILLIAM F. LAURANCE
The relentless penetration of the last of our wilderness areas is paving the way to ecological disaster.

Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://nyti.ms/1GZb2LQ

After reading the entire above article,  answer the following questions:
1)    Select a main conclusion for the entire main argument of the article.  (There are several possibilities here  for a conclusion, and you need not rely on a direct quote from the article.)
Put into standard form the author’s argument with the conclusion you selected and include all the most important main premises. You are also required to include at least two sub-arguments in your standard form, but you should include more than two sub-arguments if it adds to the coherency of the argument.   Remember that parts of any long article might not actually be parts of the argument, although you should make sure that you include all important premises of the argument.
Remember that sub-arguments should be integrated into the standard form of the entire main argument.  Examples of standard form can be found in the text and an example of sub-argument can be found in the electronic reserves article on Blackboard Learn,   “Thinking Clearly: A Guide to Critical Reasoning: Standardizing Arguments”, by Jill Leblanc.   See also the power point presentation for Week 3.
If you do not know what sub-arguments are, and how to integrate them into your standard form, you should consult me during office hours.  If you do not use standard form, you will receive a zero for this answer; and if you do not include sub-arguments (which also need to be incorporated into the standard form for the entire main argument), you will lose points on your answer.
Remember that you can reconstruct the argument in your own words – you need not rely only on direct quotes.  In addition, remember that premises have to be statements – they should not be questions.  Therefore, rephrase any questions that you think are important to this argument, into statements.
Do not try to simply “retell the entire story” and do not treat this as an outline.  The premises you select should support the conclusion you have selected (and they should be the reconstruction of the author’s argument, rather than your own argument).  In the sub-arguments that you set up, make sure that the “sub-premises” actually support the premise that you are treating as the sub-conclusion of the sub-argument.
Remember also that, in reconstructing an argument, it is not always necessary to proceed in the order of the article.   (10  points)

2)     Include in parentheses after each premise (and each sub-premise) in your argument for #1, the types of evidence that the author used (such as fact, factual judgment, reasoned speculation, conjecture, cause and effect, statistics, testimony, anecdotes, circumstantial evidence, conditional claims, analogy, etc.).  If necessary, you may discuss (in a paragraph) further types of evidence upon which the author relied (for this particular argument) that may not be indicated by the premises (and sub-premises) you include in #1, or as further explanation of the types of evidence you indicated in parentheses.   I am asking about types of evidence, as discussed in chapter 3 (pp. 93 ff of your text, and as also discussed on pp. 45 – 49, and as discussed in class and in the power point presentation from Week 5), and not the content of this evidence. (4 points)

PART III: (up to 4 points possible, but not guaranteed):
Evaluate the author’s argument that appears in the above New York Times article for Part II of this assignment in a short essay of approximately 1 – 1.5 pages double-spaced, which addresses some of the following questions in some detail.  Are you convinced by this argument, and why or why not?  Does it contradict or support what you already believe, or is the evidence that is provided either convincing or not convincing?
How well do the premises support the conclusion?  Do you think that there are any relevant premises or information that has been omitted that might change the conclusion of this argument?  Do the types of evidence upon which the author relies provide strong support for this argument?  What other information and/or types of evidence could the author use in order to improve the argument – try to be specific, that is, raise specific questions or comments.  For example, do not say, “more statistics”, but instead try to specify what types of statistics, addressing what kind of questions, might be helpful.  Do not say, “more testimony”, but instead try to specify what kind of testimony, and from whom, and why it would be important.  Moreover, are there any hidden (or implicit) assumptions that are controversial and for which the author should provide more evidence, or has the author limited himself to too few options/alternatives in making his case?
If you were to build an argument on this topic, what might be the conclusion of your own argument – you need not provide an entire argument, but you might indicate some of the evidence that you would use to support your own conclusion.

Book analysis

Graded Homework Assignment
On Description and Inference, Types of Evidence, Standard Form, Arguments and Sub-arguments
Chapters 1, 2, 3 in text
20 points Total:  20% of Final Grade

All assignments should be typed;  should include the numbers of the questions; and should follow directions below, as to use of complete sentences, standard form, sub-argument, etc. wherever I so indicate.

Part I of this assignment is based on the New York Times Magazine article, “Identification, Please” by Helen MacDonald, June 19th, 2015.  A link to this article is provided under Part I (Description and Inference).

Part II of this assignment is based on the New York Times article, “Roads to Ruin”, by op-ed contributor, William F. Laurance, April 12th, 2015.  A  link to this article is provided under Part II (on argument,  sub-argument, standard form, & types of evidence).

and Part III.

Part I:  Description and inference:  (6  points total)
This question is based on the following New York Times Magazine article:

ON NATURE
Identification, Please
BY HELEN MACDONALD
Learning how to use a field guide can make you feel at home anywhere in the world.

Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://nyti.ms/1MRG09c

The above article begins with a “description” by the author of a view of Australia’s Blue Mountains National Park.  In the first paragraph of an approximately 2 page essay (double-spaced) you should address whether or not the author also makes any inferences within her description, or if she suggests that, from the description that she has just given, that she must now make some inferences.  You need not repeat the entire description, but only have to address the question about inferences.  The rest of your approximately 2 page essay, you should address the following questions, after reading the entire above article:

Most of this article includes a discussion of “natural-history field guides” by which people can try to identify various animals, birds, and plants in nature when they come across them during hikes, in their backyards, etc.   This raises some interesting questions about description and inference.  Do these guides actually provide only “descriptions” of the birds, plants, etc.,  or do some of the guides already include inferences or interpretations of the animals and plants?  Secondly, must the user of “field guides” make inferences from the “descriptions” of birds, animals and plants in the field guides, when they are trying to identify these animals and plants in the field?   What types of inferences, and how do they make these inferences in the field?   In your essay, you should address these questions, by drawing upon examples and details from the article.  You may also include other observations or your own about what the author discusses, especially if your observations also involve your own inferences, or involve comments about what counts as description and what counts as inference.  If you have ever used a field guide or some other type of guide to make identifications, you may include your experience in the essay, too.

PART II:  Argument, Sub-Argument, Standard Form and Types of Evidence (Total: 14 points:  #1:  10 points;  #2:  4 points) TOTAL IS 4 PAGES

This part is based on the following New York Times article:

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Roads to Ruin
BY WILLIAM F. LAURANCE
The relentless penetration of the last of our wilderness areas is paving the way to ecological disaster.

Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://nyti.ms/1GZb2LQ

After reading the entire above article,  answer the following questions:
1)    Select a main conclusion for the entire main argument of the article.  (There are several possibilities here  for a conclusion, and you need not rely on a direct quote from the article.)
Put into standard form the author’s argument with the conclusion you selected and include all the most important main premises. You are also required to include at least two sub-arguments in your standard form, but you should include more than two sub-arguments if it adds to the coherency of the argument.   Remember that parts of any long article might not actually be parts of the argument, although you should make sure that you include all important premises of the argument.
Remember that sub-arguments should be integrated into the standard form of the entire main argument.  Examples of standard form can be found in the text and an example of sub-argument can be found in the electronic reserves article on Blackboard Learn,   “Thinking Clearly: A Guide to Critical Reasoning: Standardizing Arguments”, by Jill Leblanc.   See also the power point presentation for Week 3.
If you do not know what sub-arguments are, and how to integrate them into your standard form, you should consult me during office hours.  If you do not use standard form, you will receive a zero for this answer; and if you do not include sub-arguments (which also need to be incorporated into the standard form for the entire main argument), you will lose points on your answer.
Remember that you can reconstruct the argument in your own words – you need not rely only on direct quotes.  In addition, remember that premises have to be statements – they should not be questions.  Therefore, rephrase any questions that you think are important to this argument, into statements.
Do not try to simply “retell the entire story” and do not treat this as an outline.  The premises you select should support the conclusion you have selected (and they should be the reconstruction of the author’s argument, rather than your own argument).  In the sub-arguments that you set up, make sure that the “sub-premises” actually support the premise that you are treating as the sub-conclusion of the sub-argument.
Remember also that, in reconstructing an argument, it is not always necessary to proceed in the order of the article.   (10  points)

2)     Include in parentheses after each premise (and each sub-premise) in your argument for #1, the types of evidence that the author used (such as fact, factual judgment, reasoned speculation, conjecture, cause and effect, statistics, testimony, anecdotes, circumstantial evidence, conditional claims, analogy, etc.).  If necessary, you may discuss (in a paragraph) further types of evidence upon which the author relied (for this particular argument) that may not be indicated by the premises (and sub-premises) you include in #1, or as further explanation of the types of evidence you indicated in parentheses.   I am asking about types of evidence, as discussed in chapter 3 (pp. 93 ff of your text, and as also discussed on pp. 45 – 49, and as discussed in class and in the power point presentation from Week 5), and not the content of this evidence. (4 points)

PART III: (up to 4 points possible, but not guaranteed):
Evaluate the author’s argument that appears in the above New York Times article for Part II of this assignment in a short essay of approximately 1 – 1.5 pages double-spaced, which addresses some of the following questions in some detail.  Are you convinced by this argument, and why or why not?  Does it contradict or support what you already believe, or is the evidence that is provided either convincing or not convincing?
How well do the premises support the conclusion?  Do you think that there are any relevant premises or information that has been omitted that might change the conclusion of this argument?  Do the types of evidence upon which the author relies provide strong support for this argument?  What other information and/or types of evidence could the author use in order to improve the argument – try to be specific, that is, raise specific questions or comments.  For example, do not say, “more statistics”, but instead try to specify what types of statistics, addressing what kind of questions, might be helpful.  Do not say, “more testimony”, but instead try to specify what kind of testimony, and from whom, and why it would be important.  Moreover, are there any hidden (or implicit) assumptions that are controversial and for which the author should provide more evidence, or has the author limited himself to too few options/alternatives in making his case?
If you were to build an argument on this topic, what might be the conclusion of your own argument – you need not provide an entire argument, but you might indicate some of the evidence that you would use to support your own conclusion.